The Raden Report: December 18, 2000 - A case of infidelity in the public square attracted attention of some Christians when a Hindu priest from Ohio was asked to bring the invocation in a joint session of the U.S. House and Senate on September 14, 2001. "Polite universalism is America’s civil religion, and it is an absolute enemy of the gospel," was countered by others.

"Evangelicals can respond in various ways. We could recognize that under the new covenant, civil government doesn’t have authority over spiritual matters, and that legislatures shouldn’t have chaplains. (For centuries some evangelicals, such as Baptists, made this argument.)'
FYI... Roman Catholic priest Daniel Coughlin is the official chaplain for the US House of Representatives, a position funded annually by tax payers to the tune of $138,000.00. Of course, as a Roman Catholic priest, Mr. Caughlin must uphold official declarations from the Vatican.

Related to this issue of Hindu prayers, a recent Vatican document, Dominus Iesus, says "various religious traditions contain and offer religious elements which come from God... Indeed some prayers and rituals of the other religions may assume a role of preparation of the Gospel...." Shocking? Only if you are unfamiliar with Roman Catholicism’s pursuit of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue over the past 35 years.

And if that heresy isn’t clear enough, earlier this month the Pope restated his position, saying that among the saved are "All who seek God with a sincere heart, including those who do not know Christ and his church."

FIRST THINGS, 11/2000, p 84 [Roman Catholic priest Richard Neuhaus, editor, speaking]
"I was pleased to give the commencement address at Regent University (Pat Robertson, Chancellor) this spring. Afterwards a large number of people came up, each introducing himself or herself as 'the token Catholic' at Regent. When about thirty people had done so, a faculty member who had been watching all this introduced himself, 'I'm a Catholic, and I guess I'm no longer token.' As it happens, the President of Regent is also Catholic, and I am told there is a lively Newman Center on campus. Robertson and Regent have been very supportive of the project known as 'Evangelicals and Catholics Together,' and I was impressed that this was one of many places where that project is impressively lived."

Pat Robertson is one of the original endorsers of the heretical document entitled "Evangelicals and Catholics Together; The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium." The document was authored by Richard Neuhaus and Charles Colson, and boasted some forty notable evangelical and Roman Catholic signatories. Mr. Colson now calls his ecumenical ECT consortium "the ECT Alliance" and says it "represents the most significant religious movement in America today."

The ECT Alliance is a hodgepodge of individuals who hold to various conflicting doctrinal and theological positions. Consider, for instance, another ECT endorser, Roman Catholic author and professor Peter Kreeft. One of Kreeft’s more recent books is called Ecumenical Jihad and includes a chapter entitled...

"What Christians Can Learn from Confucius, Buddha, Muhammad, and Moses." In this chapter, Kreeft says he had an out-of-body experience in which he was somehow transported to the outskirts of heaven where he received instruction in the truth by Confucius, Buddha, Muhammad, and Moses. The teaching that Kreeft suggests as valid is clearly a form of universalism (remember, WORLD Magazine’s Timothy Lamer called today’s polite universalism "an absolute enemy of the gospel").

But perhaps the most amazing thing about all this is the connecting thread of Colson and Neuhaus’ ecumenical ECT Alliance. In his book Kreeft lists the ECT as one of fifteen "Pearls on the Thread of God’s Strategy" toward uniting various religions into one "ecumenical jihad" to fight in what he describes as an all-important "Culture War." And he says that to fight in this war is to "fight the good fight." Not surprisingly, Kreeft’s book boasts public endorsements by ECT co-authors Richard Neuhaus and Charles Colson. (ECT and Commentary...)

Mr. Colson is a master at teaching conservative political and moral truth and espousing popular evangelical terminology while stealthfully interjecting unbiblical statements. These statements reveal Mr. Colson’s veiled ecumenical agenda. Speaking of his belief that "Catholic, Orthodox, and fifty-seven varieties of Protestantism... basically agree on the fundamentals of the Christian faith," Mr. Colson pledged, "We will never achieve unity in my lifetime, but I intend to devote my lifetime to working toward it...." (Chuck Colson Speaks, p.120, available at LifeWay bookstores.)

In his recent book entitled How Now Shall We Live? Charles Colson says "Christian unity is the key to evangelism and cultural renewal." "The most hopeful words from any Christian leader today have come from John Paul II..." Evangelicals and Catholics must "stand together as the people of God...." (pp. 302-305) In Colson’s ECT-I document we read that even though Catholicism teaches "Baptism as a sacrament of regeneration," we must set aside this fact to accept that "the mission that we embrace together is the necessary consequence of the faith that we affirm together." In his ECT-II document, Colson says that evangelicals and Catholics must not allow their witness to be compromised by "needlessly divisive disputes" regarding such things as "the meaning of baptismal regeneration, the Eucharist, and sacramental grace...."

Since when did baptismal regeneration become anything other than heresy? When did it become biblical to include in "the Christian mission" those who hold to such perversion of the Gospel? Jesus Christ regenerates men without religious works... so, just what faith may we "affirm together" with those who trust in baptismal regeneration? Can anyone explain why so many continue to promote Charles Colson as a credible teacher of biblical truth? (Again, in October Mr. Colson was paid to speak to SBC pastors who gathered for NAMB’s "Legacy 2000 Conference" on Church Planting and Evangelism in the twenty-first century.)

Mr. Colson's How Now Shall We Live? includes strong promotion of the heretical ECT alliance as well as teaching and illustrations encouraging this same sort of ecumenical inclusiveness. How Now Shall We Live? is included as the textbook in a major LifeWay discipleship curriculum by the same title.

Does our personal respect and appreciation for the good things Mr. Colson has done somehow take away our responsibility to call him to biblical accountability for his promotion of false doctrine?..

Please consider... will an eternity in Hell be different for a person who believes Jesus is not God than for a person who trusts in baptismal regeneration? According to the Bible, don't either of these perversions of the Gospel make it "no gospel at all"?

Some have defended Mr. Colson, saying that they believe he has simply made some mistakes in choosing the words he uses to describe his beliefs. Others point to the fact that Mr. Colson does endorse statements of conservative biblical faith. And others point to his message of a "Christian Worldview" as vitally important, even if Mr. Colson does include some points of perverted doctrine. Brethren, none of these things set aside the issue regarding Mr. Colson's public promotion of perverted doctrine. Whether any person thinks it intentional or not, this is the reality.

What we have asked LifeWay to do is to (1) pull all How Now Shall We Live? materials and (2) issue an appropriate public warning regarding this book and related LifeWay materials that have already been distributed among the churches of our Convention.

Please remember to be respectful and treat our leaders as friends and fellow brethren. Give them the benefit of the doubt; some may not know anything about these things. They are daily faced with a multitude of decisions and must determine which things deserve their attention the most. All men ought to be treated with respect and courtesy, even if you disagree with them on some matter.